Agenda item

The Director for Delivery, Communications and Political Governance presents information on the Using Buildings Better programme and an update on the next phase of customer-facing buildings transformation in north-west Leicester.  The Commission is recommended to consider this information and comment as appropriate.

The Director for Delivery, Communications and Political Governance presented information on the Using Buildings Better programme and an update on the next phase of customer-facing buildings transformation in north-west Leicester.

The Commission noted that:-

·           The vision of the Using Buildings Better programme was to rationalise Council-owned premises, so that there were fewer buildings, but of a higher quality than at present;

·           That the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme was now part of the wider Using Buildings Better programme;

·           Ward Members and residents were being consulted to identify factors such as the most important services to them and where they travelled to.  Service need would then be considered to determine what access to buildings people needed before assessments were made of whether better use could be made of individual buildings;

·           Opportunities would be taken where possible to co-locate with partner agencies, such as the Police;

·           The same team as had undertaken phase 1 of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme in 2014 would be undertaking this next phase, except that consultation with young people would be undertaken by Children’s Services;

·           Additional focus group sessions had been arranged in the North West of the city for the latest consultation on youth centre provision, due to the high level of interest in the proposals for these programmes;

·            Monthly meetings would be held with trades unions representing staff to discuss progress with the programmes;

·           A list of depots, stores and workshops could be circulated, giving the addresses of these buildings, so that the buildings could be identified accurately;

·           Some wards did not have many buildings that could be used for customer-facing services.  This needed to be taken in to account when considering how services could be accommodated;

·           Use of a service could be mapped across the city.  For example, people often moved across the city to access libraries or other large facilities;

·           The accessibility of buildings for users of public transport was very important;

·           The Council was still learning the best approach to be taken when a community group took over the management of a building.  However, time would be given for officers to engage with such organisations, to help them understand what they were taking on;

·           The Locality organisation would provide advice to community groups considering taking over the management of buildings.  For example, workshops had been run explaining others’ experience of asset transfers to community groups, including the advantages and disadvantages.  Locality also could provide one-to-one support;

·           As some parts of the city did not have many Council buildings that could be used by customers, if groups representing communities could be identified and worked with to get engagement in the consultation, it could be possible to identify other buildings that could be used.  However, this was not a core focus of the review;

·           These reviews did not include examining the commissioning of community services, (for example, youth services), but focussed on the best way to enable people to access those services;

·           It was anticipated that some buildings being reviewed would have land associated with them.  The best use to be made of each would be considered on a building by building basis.  It was too early in the process to be able to give an indication of timescales for this;

·           Any capital receipts from the sale of assets would be used towards the Council’s capital programme;

·           The costs of undertaking the review were still being identified.  It would be possible to have a better idea of what these were when more information was available on what work needed to be done; and

·           It was possible that some people could be recruited to fixed-term roles, such as project manager, but the use of consultants would be limited to areas of work where skills needed could not be found through existing staff.

The Commission noted the proposals, but felt that there was confusion in renaming Transforming Neighbourhood Services as Customer Facing Buildings and requested that consideration be given to the terminology used.

Members observed that non-schools based staff would be impacted by the programme through possible changes to the way in which they worked.  For example, offices could become open-plan; work stations could be established, rather than staff having personal desks; or increased use made of flexible working arrangements.  However, as the programme was just starting, it was not possible to say exactly how, or how many, staff would be affected.  The Commission would be advised of this when the information was available.

It was suggested that school should be included in the review, as some could have space that community groups could use.  In reply, the Director of Culture and Neighbourhood Services advised Members that schools were not included.  However, the possibility of seeking to use space in them could be considered during the review.

Members also questioned whether the focus on strategic operational buildings meant that the Overview Select Committee should be responsible for the scrutiny of this review. 

AGREED:

1)    That the need to undertake the Using Buildings Better programme be noted and the broad objectives of the programme supported;

2)    That the Director for Delivery, Communications and Political Governance be asked to:-

a)     circulate a list of a list of depots, stores and workshops, giving the addresses of these buildings and the service they were used by;

b)     engage head teachers in the consultation on the Using Buildings Better programme, in order to identify the potential for use of school buildings by the community;

c)     ensure that the Overview Select Committee is updated and clarify which aspects of the Using Buildings Better programme are to be scrutinised by this Commission and which should be scrutinised by the Overview Select Committee;

d)     submit a six-month progress report on the Using Buildings Better programme to this Commission;

e)     ensure that Ward Members, local communities and local community groups are kept informed of progress with the Using Buildings Better programme and the Transforming Neighbourhood Services project in North West Leicester;

f)      ensure that the needs of vulnerable service users are taken in to account during these reviews; and

g)     submit a report on the outcome of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services project in North West Leicester as soon as it is ready.